This was sent in response to pastafarian responses from earlier hatemail/concerned criticism post.
Ok, here’s the thing. You set up a website with a place for responses. Your website takes a clearly mocking tone toward religion in general. You gather a bunch of members who agree with you and assert your scientific superiority. All that’s fine. Indeed, I’d say its even American. The thing that disturbs me is when people begin to question the RIGHT of people to “insult us, or. . . pray for us.”
That right is recorded somewhere in some dusty piece of paper – let me think . . . where could it be –
that has worked out well for us all for quite a while.The thing that turns me off, though, and weakens your position most, is that most of you are just mean. I wouldn’t want just to hang out with you at a bar or anywhere else, because your arguments primarily seem to consist of making fun of people. Indeed, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is pretty much one big Ad Hominem argument. It adds nothing to a discussion of the validity of faith, because it is not about faith. (The person who writes that they “believe” in Atheism I’ll give a pass to on this comment.)
Even if Katie is condescending, your responses are more so. It is the lack of love that makes me question your entire premise. Indeed, your definition of hate is awfully broad. It sounds, how shall I put it, downright religious. Even if we live in a Foucaldian world in which our choices are driven by zeitgeist and social darwinism, I personally am going to choose to reject that. I will defiantly assert that even in that world, Faith is still relevant (and if you read his last interviews, I think Michel might agree).
Even if God were not true, I think I’ll still take Katie, who clearly has concern for you (even if you think it is misguided) over you guys who are interested in intellectually crushing her. Just because you have a right to speak doesn’t mean that Katie shouldn’t, and you certainly “have no right” to expect most people who respond to like you if you are going to beat on them.
Take a real philosophical position that can be debated and we’ll talk. Claiming that principles are “generally accepted” won’t do it, and don’t even begin to bring “peer review” in to support claims of truth, because “peer review”, even at its best, isn’t about truth – it’s about methodology and rhetoric.
Otherwise, quit wasting my time.
P.S. Has anyone here actually honestly asked God whether He exists? Just curious as to whether this is an intellectually honest forum or an ideologically rigid one.
-Jeremy
The bottom line is that everyone has a right to their own viewpoint, but that doesn’t make it okay for them to seek to impose their views upon others, either via the education system or patronising submissions to a website.
I don’t advocate being rude to anyone – courtesy is generally appropriate and doesn’t cost anything. That is one of the many reasons that I do not surf religious websites to tell the Katies of the world that I hope that they will one day get over the events in their life that has made them pick up the psychological crutch that is medieval superstition of religion.
I applaud Katie for at least trying to be polite.
On the point of talking to god, I too tried it when I was younger – addressing my words to the god randomly selected for me by virtue of him being the one generally applicable to my country of birth. I too got the dial tone. If you wish to tell me which god you would like me to speak to and provide a convincing argument as to why I should prefer he, she or it over the many others on offer in the world I will have another go just for you.
One final and slightly more controversial point – do be careful about advocating The American Way; for some people in the world it translates into ‘agree with us and do as we say or we will drop large quantities of high explosive on you’, whic is neither polite nor a particulalry ‘philosophical’ position.
Regards,
Uthor
Like or Dislike:
81 
4
But christians are supposed to be better people than us (according to them),also tolerant and many others qualities.What I read here doesn’t show me tolerance,love…
I never insult christians or others on their website.Why I should accept they do?
And we are not a bunch,over 20 millions in the world.
Like or Dislike:
25 
2
The word you want is Agnostic theism. You are in no way an atheist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_theism
I doubt (hopefully) that there are any atheists who are so extremely rigid in that they deny the minuscule chance of a god (much the same way there might really be the invisible pink unicorn hiding somewhere) but we live our life such that we do not give any consideration to any possible gods or spirits or gnomes unless they promise to quit playing hide and seek. (FSM excluded, may he bless you with a bounty of meatballs.)
Like or Dislike:
13 
2
Like or Dislike:
29 
3
I don’t think that I’m a deist since I don’t necessarily believe a god created the universe. I did however click on some of the other links and naturalistic pantheism makes more sense… kind of that the universe isn’t necessarily sentient (though, being agnostic and all I could be wrong) but a bunch of parts working for a whole. It sounds bizzare, but the best way I can describe it is that everything is energy in varying levels of complexity (and with complexity, consciousness)but kind of the same in origin/incomprehensible infinity, going through cycles of energy exchange (per biology class)…hmm. I sound crazy. So, humans being a part of nature rather than nature designed for humans makes more sense to me.
But I’m 17, so who knows what I’ll end up thinking. The FSM (bless his noodly appendages) may have a convert yet if I don’t just give up and stick with agnosticism!
Soo. Anyone get what I am trying to say? Am I just off my rocker? I have a tendency to think a bit too…abstractly.
Like or Dislike:
10 
0
Maybe the confusion was over my use of the word “spiritual” in the original post (or maybe there was no confusion). Sorry, my diction isn’t the best in this area.
But the Einstein view with deism is amazing (even if I don’t share his views 100%). Thanks for the info.
R’Amen.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I see that Katie’s letter is linked here, so everything can be checked. When she wrote, I commented (#22) on her apparent lack of knowledge and what she would need to learn to be able to discuss her concerns rationally with us. A considerable number of other pastafarians also addressed her before and after my entry. She did respond to us all (#92), and she admitted her academic shortcomings in a most civil manner. You also need to study that thread and be prepared to tell us if you have the linguistic, historic, political, and economic background to comment on our website.
You must understand that we’re at home here, and you are a visitor. We will defend our turf vigorously. I assume that you have read the Open Letter and the “About” tab material when you entered the site.
I’ve attached a link to a talk by Dr. Andy Thomson who discusses measurements that correlate neuroscience to human religious needs and brain responses. Let’s listen to it carefully and critically:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg
It seems to me that it correlates our physiological needs as helpless infants with our psychological fears as adults as far as MRI brain activity is concerned.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
20 
0
I think that you are the one who needs to start asking the question of whether or not god exists. Don’t ask him. Your mind will tell you whatever you think you want to hear. Try some deductive reasoning and educate yourself instead of running around going after those that have.
Like or Dislike:
36 
0
And a little point of information: there are people that are not American: really! (just thought I’d point that out given that only about 1 in 5 of you even own a passport….remember “traveliness is next to noodliness”).
Be happy! “Judge not lest your pasta be not al dente.” 3:18 Book of Non-Sequitors.
Like or Dislike:
10 
0
Has anyone here ever ask God if he existed and received an answer??
If so, seek professional help immediately. Especially if the answer came via
your neighbor’s dog, and you were instructed to kill.
Like or Dislike:
13 
0
I’m actually glad that you posted this. As a Pastafarian, I often refrain from clicking the HateMail tab. Not because I’m afraid of those who don’t understand our beliefs or feel that my decision to follow His Sauciness is wrong. But because I don’t like reading the responses of fellow Pastafarians.
Even though I whole-heartedly agree with our right to defend our beliefs, I don’t believe that even if someone attacks us, we have to take the same aggressive and honestly undignified tone. Whoever said pirates can’t be civilized now and then? I’m a pirate simply because I love the waters, the ships, the sea, and His Noodly Appendages. Not because I’m rowdy, uncouth, aggressive, or like to argue.
I like debating but honestly so little actual debating happens here that I fear it’s worthless to even try.
Until we both find fairer seas to sail,
Reverand Nibby
Like or Dislike:
17 
9
have you ever asked the Flying Spaghetti Monster if He exists?
Like or Dislike:
25 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
1 
63
Like or Dislike:
16 
0
Like or Dislike:
16 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
1 
46
If it is a complete joke then it doesn’t need a funnier name.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Us Fags? who was the man who lived well into his 30’s and never had sexual relations? talk about the 30 year old virgin! HAHA. Why dont we go back to abusing young children and having unportected anal sex with old men? i think you have us confused with your catholic priests We fine Pastafarians have plenty of Sea Wenches to sex up and fresh beer to drink, ARR! IF YE WERE HERE ID MAKE YOU WALK THA PLANK!
RAmen!
Like or Dislike:
10 
13
“Why don’t you just go back to abusing young children and having unprotected anal sex with older men”
Wrong religion Jesus, your thinking of your own religion! PS my Mum said you still own her £20!
@ 66 J money
“this is a complete joke”
Well done, what do you want a medal or a chest to pin it on?
Like or Dislike:
9 
12
@ 66 – J money – ,
You seem to almost get it.
This is our website, and we are fully justified in defending our cause. It is the exclusion of religious mythology from public school science curricula. Our theology is a satire that depends on and demeans no other faith or religion. You have obviously not read and understood both the Open Letter and the “About Tab” material as you were directed when you entered this site.
Carefully read the comments of Southern Ptarmigan (tenth down in the comments section) who has this question fully in perspective. S/He is a well educated evangelical Christian:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=letters-may-2009&sc=DD_20090508
Remember that you believe whatever it is that you do believe in because it’s what your parents or priest believe:
http://www.sciam.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=why-people-believe-what-they-do-09-04-10&sc=DD_20090413
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
Recently I have discovered the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s mythological sibling, the Floating Pizza Pie Minion. She is just as cute as TFSM. I just cannot believe that anyone would send hate mail to you. Didn’t they just pass a law against this?
A Marginal Believer, but certainly NOT a Skeptic.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
2 
32
-
Here I am. Posting again to this string. Remember back on October 30th (#27) I “asked God if he actually exists.” You suggested I do this, Jeremy. All I requested was a simple demonstration that would have made me an instant convert. A positive result would have been a pretty minor miracle. A computer crashing isn’t even much of a miracle, mine crashes all the time.
-
But it seems that the all-powerful God, who created the universe and has the power to flood the earth and kill all mankind, not to mention killing all the first-born in Egypt, was unable to screw up my Intel chip and thus keep me from adding this post.
-
Well, those who read this post can draw their own conclusions. Personally, I’m giving up on God permanently (and that goes for you too Thor, Jupiter, Zeus, and the other 3,000 or so gods). You flunked the test. So there!
-
ATSAP REVOL, The Disillusioned One
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
3 
28
I did’nt know Jesus was this rude (also the translation of the bible is wrong Jesus is meant to be called Joshua look it up).
J money read the about page and you might understand what it’s about.
Jeremy we are for the most part not rude (some people get carried away) and we argue are points in a correct and structured manner backing up our points with actual evidence.
Please read the about tab and learn about exactly what the FSM is.
Thank you.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
I’m not sure what to make of the appearance of “Islamic trolls”. They sound fake-and not good fakes at that. While I have a bone to pick with Islam-sorry to disappoint you guys, I won’t bite.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Ah … , I’m not very digital and by mistake happened to press the dislike-thumb for entry 51 – so there’s one to many dislike-thumbs and there should be one more like. Tricky …
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4
Im not trying to be mean but i just honestly want to know if this is a joke or not?
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
I’m afraid to make comments here anymore because of those thumbs.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
Ooh, you almost had me until your PS.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Jeremy,
Thank you for the nice post, although I did find some of the logic and formation of your points/arguments to be not very……logical.
The main point I would like to comment on however, is your PS.
“P.S. Has anyone here actually honestly asked God whether He exists?”
For this post I will assume that you are referring to the Christian God.
I am unsure about what exactly this would prove? I am happy to ask god whether he exists. But let us examine the possible outcomes?
God answers – How do we prove that this is really god answering? We would have to rule out mental illness of any kind or course, plus many other possible explanations such as earthly radio transmissions, local pre-recorded play back etc. Even if we could record a voice or communication how would that prove that it is a god and even if we got that far, which god it actually is? So an answer really proves very little.
There is no answer – Unfortunately this doesn’t prove that there is no god as some of my fellow pastafarians have suggested. It only suggests two possible theories, that god may not exist and that is why there is no answer is only one. The other is that god/gods has not answered because they have made a conscious effort not to do so, unfortunately this does not help either theory. How inconsiderate.
I consider myself to be extremely open minded, as do many posters on this site, I am happy to believe any theory once proof (that is repeatable and open to peer review) is offered to me. I am also happy to refine these theories if new evidence that better fits the real and measurable world I live in appears.
Roger the Dodger
PS I did Google “faith” to see if any definitions would be useful in my arguments however the fact that
“Faith is the eighth episode in the fourth season of the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica. It first aired on television on May 9, 2008. The episode guest starred actress Nana Visitor, best known for her role as Kira Nerys on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.”
wasn’t particularly helpful! You’ve just got to love the fountain of all truth that is the internet.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
@Reverand Nibby (#61)
You said, “Even though I whole-heartedly agree with our right to defend our beliefs, I don’t believe that even if someone attacks us, we have to take the same aggressive and honestly undignified tone.”
I’d like to remind you of the Fifth “I’d Really Rather You Didn’t,” which states, “I’d Really Rather You Didn’t challenge bigoted, misogynist, hateful ideas of others on an empty stomach. Eat, then go after the bitches.”
Now, I’m not advocating just running amok and attaching everyone you encounter, with whom you might have a disagreement, but when they come to the web site of The Church of The Flying Spaghetti Monster and attack us, there is no need to show any restraint.
RAmen
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Jeremy,
When you say,
“Take a real philosophical position that can be debated and we’ll talk. Claiming that principles are “generally accepted” won’t do it, and don’t even begin to bring “peer review” in to support claims of truth, because “peer review”, even at its best, isn’t about truth – it’s about methodology and rhetoric.”
Do you realize how foolish you sound? The peer review system has brought us to the technological paradise we now inhabit. Is it a perfect Eden? Well no, however if you were to ask any person from any previous point in history if they’d like to go back after receiving the benefits of our scientific culture I strongly doubt you’d get many takers.
Then again if you want to value philosophy over science perhaps you believe that nonsense about all learning being some form of past existence recollection. For us to debate you do we have to accept any other nonsensical restrictions? Maybe we should agree not to have to use the English language or refrain from using the letter y as a vowel. If we have to limit our responses for the privilege of debating you I tend to think you aren’t worth debating. More likely agreeing to debate you would be a great second hand experience with the likes of Ray Comfort.
-Apostate
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Jeremy,
I have asked God if he exists. I didn’t get any response. Therefore, either the answer is, “No”, or the answer is, “You know what? I’d prefer to see you burn in a fiery wasteland for all of eternity rather than let you know that I’m real.” Which dost ye think is more likely?
Au contraire, I don’t need to ask His Noodly Holiness if He exists. I see His grace everyday (especially on Fridays, because Friday is pasta-night at my house). Not to mention His ten “I’d Really Rather You Didn’t’s” make much more sense than those commandment-thingys I read in that other book.
This was mostly in response to your P.S. I figured most people would respond to your not-P.S.
Best Regards,
Me
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I thought Pastafarianism was pretty funny myself.
“The thing that turns me off, though, and weakens your position most, is that most of you are just mean. I wouldn’t want just to hang out with you at a bar or anywhere else, because your arguments primarily seem to consist of making fun of people. Indeed, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is pretty much one big Ad Hominem argument. It adds nothing to a discussion of the validity of faith, because it is not about faith. (The person who writes that they “believe” in Atheism I’ll give a pass to on this comment.)”
Firstly, I don’t think you know what Ad Hominem means, and if you do you’re then using it wrong. FSMism isn’t an attack on another faith, it IS another faith (and a better one IMO). Ad Hominem is an argument that consists of attcking another view/belief/idea because of the person making it, i.e. “Hitler encouraged Christian family values ergo Christian family values are bad”. If this site was “There are lots of pedophile Catholic priests, so Catholicism is bad”, you’d be spot on – but it isn’t and you’re not. The reason the argument Ad Hominem is a bad technique is because it forgoes analysis of the actual argument in favour of personal attacks, not because it’s ‘mean’ – meanness and kindness have nothing, repeat nothing, to do with the validity of an argument. To illustrate, 1 + 1 =/= kind.
Also, by definition people don’t ‘believe’ in atheism, it’s an absence of belief as indicated by the term ‘theism’ with the prefix ‘a’, i.e. ‘not-theism’.
But it’s the bar comment that really gets me going here.
Lemme see: Katie’s a Christian so amongst other things her faith requires feeling guilty about natural sexual urges (much of the fun of hanging at bars is drunken hook-ups IMO), drink is bad unless it’s Jesus’ blood drunk in Church, devoting oneself above all others to a 2000-year old zombie Jew, and telling people they’re going to Hell if the don’t do the same. Sounds like kind of a downer at a social situation, no?
Pastafarianism, on the other hand, is funny, quite witty, encourages drinking, revelry, mutually consenting sexual liaisons, has primarily intelligent, educated adherents, and perhaps most importantly, features pirates. I’d rather hang at a bar with fellow FSMists than a good Christian. It’s kind of like having a choice between partying down with your stodgy, conservative, half-senile grandma or Jack Sparrow – sure, they’re both crazy but at least Jack is fun.
“Even if Katie is condescending, your responses are more so. It is the lack of love that makes me question your entire premise. Indeed, your definition of hate is awfully broad. It sounds, how shall I put it, downright religious. Even if we live in a Foucaldian world in which our choices are driven by zeitgeist and social darwinism, I personally am going to choose to reject that. I will defiantly assert that even in that world, Faith is still relevant (and if you read his last interviews, I think Michel might agree).”
So, what you’re getting at is that lack of love invalidates one’s premise(s)? I think I begin to see your real beef with peer-review here.
Furthermore, I’ll have you know the Pastafarian faith (Church of the FSM? Faith? Get the link here?) is made with 10% more love than the next leading brand.
“Even if God were not true, I think I’ll still take Katie, who clearly has concern for you (even if you think it is misguided) over you guys who are interested in intellectually crushing her. Just because you have a right to speak doesn’t mean that Katie shouldn’t, and you certainly “have no right” to expect most people who respond to like you if you are going to beat on them.”
“Even if”? Sure, it’s possible, but not very plausible. Perhaps we’re concerned for you and Katie, inasmuch as you’re both wasting your lives on a false religion and a false God when clearly the FSM is the true faith, and much more enjoyable to boot. Maybe we feel a little bad that you’ll only have stale beer and diseased strippers in Heaven, which will be a downer to watch while we’re partying in FSM Heaven. Also, humble though it may be this is our Church – by posting here you are figuratively entering our Church to discuss our beliefs. We don’t go into your Church, attack your beliefs, and then when you defend your beliefs and critique your debatees claim you’re ‘beating on them’.
We don’t expect people to like us in a ‘Hate mail’ section, but just as Katie has the right to respond to us so we have the right to respond to her responses and so on – it’s called dialogue, and is akin to a conversation where both parties address each other more than once.
“Take a real philosophical position that can be debated and we’ll talk. Claiming that principles are “generally accepted” won’t do it, and don’t even begin to bring “peer review” in to support claims of truth, because “peer review”, even at its best, isn’t about truth – it’s about methodology and rhetoric.”
No, it’s about methodology, rhetoric has nothing to do with it. To try to ensure that theories are true (inasmuch as we can ever be certain anyway), accurate, and to stop people from just making shit up and having it widely accepted as gospel truth.
“P.S. Has anyone here actually honestly asked God whether He exists? Just curious as to whether this is an intellectually honest forum or an ideologically rigid one.”
I did last Tuesday and he clearly told me he didn’t exist, and encouraged me to stay a FSMist.
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
Well, at least we have some hate mail that isn’t written by a swearing 4 year old. After becoming a pastafarian and reading the hate mail, it seemed that every Christian never actually went to church (And if they had, they didn’t seem to take away anything from it). One of the major problems with your post however, Jeremy, is that if I were to ask God if He existed, and I WERE to get a response from whatever creature/omnipotent deity that is ‘up there’, I would immediately go tell everyone I knew that I had been contacted by God. If they were to ask for proof, I would simply tell them to ask God if He existed. He would then tell THEM he did, and Christianity/Catholicism/ whatever the being adhered to would suddenly be the ONLY religion in the world. Just the fact that there is more than one religion PROVES that your ‘God’ does not exist, or at least, if He does, He CLEARLY doesn’t go around telling everybody he exists. Whereas with His Almighty Noodlieness, he reaches out and touches everyone. Some, more than others, as I can clearly tell, he missed you. However, since the FSM is shy, he doesn’t go around smiting people, or burning bushes, or parting seas. Why do you think that so called ‘Miracles’ never happen anymore? Because every one of them is either just someone lying, or the very small probability showing that a one in a billion chance, actually will happen to six people on this earth.
Just some food for thought. In fact, its pasta.
P.S. Have you tried asking YOURSELF if there is a God? Cause YOU is the only person who can answer that for yourself.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Can you (or anyone else) expound upon the atheist v. agnostic distiction? I have considered myself an agnostic for a while now, but I may actually be an atheist. I believe that there is some sort of spiritual force that links everything together (that can’t really be explained/understood now because of our limitations, just like the concept of infinity) rather than a personal god… can I see life in these terms and still be an atheist?
Any replys are appreciated, even “F you pussy fence-sitter” cuz at least I’ll have a good laugh. :)
R’Amen.
Sounds like either pantheism or mysticism to me, subject to whether you’ve had direct experience of said spiritual force (mysticism, as well as being a pastafarian I’m an absurdist mystic myself, you can actually be both) or whether you’ve just watched too much Star Wars (pantheism) ;-).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Lexicalann, please tell me more about Floating Pizza Pie Minion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You are free to decide what to do with your time, so don’t blame us.
If you consider that being part of this forum is an enriching experience, go on…
If not, QUIT WASTING YOUR TIME
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Unfortunately, Jeremy, as reasonable and well written as your letter is, you miss the point of FSM entirely. The argument is not about the validity of faith, as you state. The argument is whether beliefs based solely on “faith” have any place being taught in a science classroom. They do not. People are free to believe whatever they like. You can have faith in God or Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny for all I care, but that doen’t mean that you should be teaching school children that, for example, faster than light travel is clearly possible because Santa can travel around the world in one night delivering presents to good boys and girls. When people ignore scientific fact in favor of beliefs derived from parables written 2000 years ago, and then claim that their faith based beliefs are “science”, that is extremely insulting to all reasoning people. For arguments sake, let’s say god does indeed exist, and he did create all of us in his image. WHY would he not want us to use the brains he gave us to try and figure out how this universe actually works? Why would he expect us to smother our intellict in favor of a bunch of stories written by people who lived before the kind of scientific enquiry we are capable of today was possible? The Bible is not a science textbook, it was never intended as a science textbook, and to treat it like one makes absolutely no sense. If you want to use that particular “dusty piece of paper” (I’m assuming excluding all the parts about rape, incest, parricide, infanticide, plagues, famines, wars, talking snakes, demons, risen dead etc, etc, not to mention the rampant mistranslations and misinterpretations) as a moral guide (however that might be possible), so be it. But don’t pretend that it is something that it isn’t.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
#79:
Augh! Regarding my last post…I reread the original letter and I misread a line! I somehow thought Jeremy was refering to religion and the bible when he actually meant the Constitution (”dusty piece of paper” indeed). Yes, the Constitution and the Bill of rights are good. Apologies. My bad. However, the rest of my response stands. I’ll try counting to ten and proofreading before I hit submit next time!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Actually something being “generally accepted” is all the proof that was needed when I was studying theology. My eyes were opened wide to this when I did a paper challenging one of the long held views of the Church and I was assigned an F on it because, and I’m quoting, “Many great thinkers disagree with you.” That was it. I was wrong because my idea was new and not well established and those of the past had more of a following. I was almost immediatly an athiest, and eventually embraced by his Noodly Appendage. God and FSM both supported my conversion; they told me so. It turned out to be a good move actually. I changed my major from theology to engineering and I’m much happier and less confrontational now. Out of respect for my ex-church, I will not divulge which Faith I previously put my flag behind.
Neither Fact nor Truth is democratic, they never has been. And while Truth can be extremely elusive, at least Fact does what it can to give us an idea of where it is. And most of the time we’re good at getting things at least in the ballpark of Fact.
Peer review, in it’s purest and intended form, exists so that others may attempt the same experiment and see if the results agree. The scientific method IS perfect, it’s just unfortunate that we’re all humans because we are not perfect. Being humans, we occasionally screw things up or don’t follow the method as it should be followed. We skip steps, we allow our personal feelings and alliances taint our interpretation of the results, we fake results to try to gain notoriety, and without regard we refuse to acknowledge the work of others when it conflicts with our view. This has nothing to do with the method and everything to do with accepting our fallibility. But even with these failings we have to hope that there are enough of us trying to do it the right way and progress our species.
In Love and Pasta,
Pastafarian Taco
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Just understand that any way you slice it, praying for the soul of another person is condescending because people are doing it for their own selfish motives. They’re concerned about the fate of their own souls. They were told that they MUST SAVE the non-believers. They have no proof that they’re going to a land of sunshine and buttercups- the very notion of sunshine and buttercups is a SCARE TACTIC (which is also not logically sound) designed to make them shut up and do whatever it is that the person with the magical book of Diety wants them to do.
R’amen,
KatetheKate
P.S. Yes. I did. It still doesn’t change anything, because regardless of whether or not I heard HER, it cannot be scientifically validated, because that’s not what FAITH is about.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Yes! I just did, God says “I do exist”. Thinking I may be crazy I asked the dust bunnies under my bed if I should trust him, they said “No”.
Now I’m back were I started…. :(
Like or Dislike:
20 
0